NSW police should use their firearms only as a last resort in a
situation where lives are in danger, NSW Premier Bob Carr says.

Brazilian electrician Jean Childs de Menezes was killed
- shot in the head -by British police after being chased
through Stockwell Underground Station in south London last Friday.
Police mistook Menezes for a suicide bomber.

Mr Carr said today that NSW police might use their firearm only
if there was a "grievous risk" to officers or to the public.

"If there is such a threat, the police officer will only use his
or her firearm as a last resort," he told reporters.

"If the officer could restrain the person by another means, that
is by the baton or by capsicum spray they would obviously use that
as the first option."

He said that, if a choice was made to use a firearm, police
would aim for the centre of the suspect's body.

The Premier said this policy would not be reviewed.

But Prime Minister John Howard said he believed the Government
needed to stand behind police and security services at times like
this.

"Obviously it is not for me to comment on the detail of the
British police action. My remarks included the British police but
were more generally directed at the resolute and calm way in which
the public responded," he told ABC Radio.

"Clearly there are issues in relation to that but they will be
dealt with in accordance with the processes.

"I have to express the view that, at a time like this,
Government, leaders should stand behind their police and their
security forces and that applies whether you are the Prime Minister
of Australia or the Prime Minister of Britain."

Mr Howard said he would not be drawn into a debate on details of
the incident in which a plainclothes British policeman shot dead a
man believing him to be a suicide bomber.

He turned out to have been a Brazilian electrician.

"It is not appropriate for me to do so, and you will understand
that," he said.

Mr Howard said thousands of innocent people had been murdered by
terrorists.

"Surely that is the dominant consideration," he said.

"It is tragic that it happened. The British police have said
that. Let the British deal with that issue."

Asked if any Australian agencies had what was described as a
shoot-to-kill policy, Mr Howard replied: "We have appropriate
policies."

Mr Howard said it could be argued that there was a failure of
intelligence every time there was a terrorist attack.

"That just underlines the huge challenge that we face," he said.
"It is not a question of something having gone wrong. That is the
equivalent of saying that our criminal investigation system fails
every time there is a robbery or every time there is a murder.

"You can't look at it that way. That is an unreasonable standard
to impose upon our intelligence services."

Mr Howard said British intelligence and police had been warning
that an attack was likely or inevitable, although there was no
specific warning of this attack.

He said the issue of an ID card had been around for a long time and
was one of many issues but it should not dominate the terrorism
debate in Australia.

"I don't think it is a difficult issue. We haven't adopted a
policy," he said. "There is nothing wrong with people expressing
their own views in advance of a policy being adopted or not
adopted."

Mr Howard said he wanted to co-operate with the Opposition and
state premiers to get the right counter-terrorism response but in
the end the Government had to make decisions.

"Obviously there will be public debate if we propose to change the
law," he said.

"All I have said, and it is self-evidently commonsense, is that if
we are looking at whether our terrorist laws should be
strengthened, we will look at the laws of a similar country in that
same area.

"It may well be that when we examine the change the British
propose, that there will be nothing particularly relevant."